Will someone kindly define RPG? Sure it means Role Playing Game. What qualifies as RPG or not? Does it have to have a specific triat such as stats? a certain camera angle? Where is the line going to be drawn at RPG and non-RPG? Could something life half-life qualify as an RPG because you play the role of the character Gordon Freeman? I have had some interesting discussions with a friend of mine who is a serious RPG fan. He says an RPG has to have stats - like HP and MP etc. What do you guys think of this? Never cross the thin line between bravery and stupidity.

Here''s how I look at it...a "true" role playing game would be one in which you are thrown into some world, and you have to do something. You can do basically whatever you want, it''s completely up to your descresion. There could be a storyline that goes with it, but to maintain the role playing-ness of it, you''d have to have the option of not doing what the storyline wants. In other words, you can follow the story''s path, or do your own thing. In this sort of game, you basically become the charecter, and anything you think the charecter would do in any situation is a valid option with consequences associated with it. If you want to rescue the girl''s cat from the tree, go ahead. Want to eat the cat once it''s down, and then kill the girl? That''s cool too. This is extremely difficult to do using computers, because it''s pretty complex, so the games you see are sort of hybrids.

This sort of game has role playing elements, in the sense that as you move along, your charecter develops into something new. Generally, it''s just a stronger version of the original. But you can''t really "become" the charecter because there''s a set task that you''ve got to accomplish in order to advance the game. The way in which you accomplish this can be varied, but in the end you''re still going to end up defeating the evil magician or returning the sacred crystals to the alternate dimension. Because of this, the story becomes much more important. If I''m going to have to rescue this princess, then I''d better be told a great story in the process. This is much easier to do, because there''s a limited number of choices available to the player. I can''t think of a single computer/console RPG on the market that doesn''t fit this description. Some are pretty close to being "true" RPGs, but they''re still not quite there.

Now, that being said, I personally consider any game in which a charecter becomes stronger as a direct result of the actions taken by the player to be a role playing game. Some have more role playing elements than others, but they''re all still role playing games. This includes both Diablo and Diablo II. It doesn''t matter if the charecter is given all sorts of charecterization (basically any of Square''s recent RPGs), or none (Diablo). Quality of story, or lack thereof, also doesn''t apply. If the charecter changes, it''s an RPG.

Note, however, that this doesn''t apply to games where you get stronger by finding newer, better weapons or anything like that. Metroid isn''t an RPG, and neither is Mega Man. They''re action games. Now, if Sheamus (or whatever that chick''s name is in Metroid) learned her new abilities after killing x number of bad guys, it would qualify.

CM

Role playing games:
Final Fantasy, Cronotrigger, Castlevania, Bubble Bobble, Excitebike, Wasteland, Lego Racers, Blaster Master, The Last Ninja, NBA Jam, Bust-A-Move, Disney''s version of Tetris, Scorched Earth, SkiFree, SimCity, Zork, Pacman and a few more...

Non-role playing games:
Non-Disney Tetris (Original style), Solitare, Freecell, Minesweeper, Extreme Pinball, Qix, and a few more...

Basically (or technically) any game where you assume the role of another is "role playing" in my book; but I guess we''ll have to do with games involving "stats" and such as "roleplaying" because thats what most gamers definitions are. (And also, what else would those games be called? "Lots of story with a numbered battle system game"- LOSWANBSG... doesn''t have a nice ring to it.)

.travois.

(This is once of those topics that last for months and reach 200 or so replies... let''s keep it on the lowdown.)

Is The Legend Of Zelda: Link To The Past an RPG?


I''ve always thought of it as one, but after reading these definitions, I am not too sure.


Thanks,
Dennis

There are two ways to look at it really....

The first is what a casual gamer thinks of it. What someone who wants to play an RPG on the Playstation would consider an RPG....
Final Fantasy...it has to have HP, MP, it has to be long, more than 20 hours...and it has to have lots of characters, and the battle system is set up differently than any other game.

The second is for the more text oriented fans....You are that person or being, you do what you think they should do, not what the character wants you to do..

There is another one....someone who''s first RPG was Final Fanatasy 7, and they know no others before it....these people expect long game, good story, and cg cinemas....

what you are is what you prefer..

I had an interesting idea for an RPG. It would be from the 3rd person perspective, without MP or levels. The characters looks would slowly change as the character became more powerful (with hidden experience points so the player never sees ''Bucky has earned 8393837 exp''). I think it would be kind of neat because the character just gets stronger over time (more like real life) without having to drag the player out of the story and say ''your character is just a computer animation with xxxx exp points''. Sure it would be a nightmare to program but it could turn out quite neat, I think.

What do you guys/gals think of this?

Never cross the thin line between bravery and stupidity.

I''m not sure if that would be hard implement....the hidden experience points wouldn''t be all that hard to do, but the fact that you are slowly letting the character grow and evolve into a stronger and more developed person....that might be a lot harder to do.

But didn''t landfish or someone else bring up something like this a long time ago? something about hidden stats? i think so, but i didnt pay much attention to that thread.

I dont know if an RPG is signified by the stats or not. i almost want to venture out and say that it isnt an RPG without the stats....but others will flame me for it.

I just think that taking away the stats too much would turn it into either another genre, a simulation with story elements, or an action game, or another number of genres....

Dont flame me, just keep telling what you think.

Thats exactly what my friend said. He said it wouldn''t be an RPG without stats, items, etc. I personally think it would still be an RPG. How about some other opinions out there?

Never cross the thin line between bravery and stupidity.

i think u need the stats because the character grown, there must be a way of measuring the progress. but there does not have to be a lot of items or a lot of stats and stuff IMO.


--I don''t judge, I just observe
Stuck in the Bush''s, Florida

Most MMORPGs are "true" RPGs by your definition. You enter a world and become a member of the society there. You can do whatever you want. To simulate this in single-player, you will need damn smart AI that can react realistically to anything you do, as opposed to reacting in prescripted ways to a small number of possible events. Also, freeform speech, as opposed to dialogue trees, are a very important part of true RPG-ness, which is only possible in multiplayer, currently. This will change, but slowly.

~CGameProgrammer( );